Weed Risk Assessment for

United States indica (L.) Kuntze () – Department of Agriculture Water snowflake

Animal and Health Inspection Service

June 14, 2012

Version 1

Nymphoides indica plant in (source: Lock, 2010).

Agency Contact:

Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory Center for Plant Health Science and Technology

Plant Protection and Quarantine Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service United States Department of Agriculture 1730 Varsity Drive, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27606

Weed Risk Assessment for

Introduction Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) regulates noxious weeds under the authority of the Plant Protection Act (7 U.S.C. § 7701-7786, 2000) and the Federal Seed Act (7 U.S.C. § 1581-1610, 1939). A noxious weed is “any plant or plant product that can directly or indirectly injure or cause damage to crops (including nursery stock or plant products), livestock, poultry, or other interests of agriculture, irrigation, navigation, the natural resources of the United States, the public health, or the environment” (7 U.S.C. § 7701-7786, 2000). We use weed risk assessment (WRA) —specifically, the PPQ WRA model1—to evaluate the risk potential of , including those newly detected in the United States, those proposed for import, and those emerging as weeds elsewhere in the world.

Because our WRA model is geographically and climatically neutral, it can be used to evaluate the baseline invasive/weed potential of any plant species for the entire United States or any area within it. We use a climate matching tool in our WRAs to evaluate those areas of the United States that are suitable for the establishment of the plant. We also use a Monte Carlo simulation to evaluate the consequences of uncertainty on the outcome of the risk assessment. For more information on the PPQ WRA process, please refer to the document, Introduction to the PPQ Weed Risk Assessment Process, which is available upon request.

Nymphoides indica (L.) Kuntze – Water snowflake Species Family: Menyanthaceae Information Initiation: On October 28, 2010, Rick Iverson, weed specialist with the North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, notified Al Tasker (Plant Protection and Quarantine) of his intent to regulate three species of Nymphoides as state Noxious Weeds in North Carolina (Iverson, 2010). Rick asked if PPQ had assessed these species. The Plant Epidemiology and Risk Analysis Laboratory had completed one assessment and agreed to collaborate on completing assessments for the other two species: Nymphoides indica (herein) and N. peltata (Iverson, 2010). Foreign distribution: Nymphoides indica is native to tropical America (Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, South America), Asia (India, China, Korea, Taiwan, Japan),

and Australia (Ohwi, 1984; Ornduff, 1969). It is an endangered species in Japan (Shibayama and Kadono, 2007a). U.S. distribution and status: Nymphoides indica is native to Puerto Rico (Ornduff, 1969; NRCS, 2011), but is a naturalized exotic plant in Texas (Saunders, 2004) and Florida (Kartesz, 2010; Wunderlin, 1982). In Florida, herbicides trials are being conducted to control N. indica in natural environments (Puri and Haller, 2010). WRA area: Entire United States, including territories

1. Nymphoides indica analysis Establishment/Spread Nymphoides indica is an aquatic plant that has naturalized in Texas and Florida, and is Potential spreading rapidly in Florida (Saunders, 2004; Jacono, 2002). It reproduces sexually through seed, and vegetatively through the production of turion-like propagules in the

1 Koop, A., L. Fowler, L. Newton, and B. Caton. 2012. Development and validation of a weed screening tool for the United States. Biological Invasions 14(2):273-294. DOI:10.1007/s10530-011-0061-4

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 2 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

roots (Lock, 2010; Shibayama and Kadono, 2003). Its seeds can persist over three years at the bottom of ponds (Shibayama and Kadono, 2007a). The seeds of N. indica are dispersed by water (Chuang and Ornduff, 1992) and likely by birds (Barker and Vestjens, 1990). Seeds may also be dispersed unintentionally by humans, since seeds of the related N. peltata are spread by boats and fishing gear (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009). This risk element had moderate uncertainty. Risk score = 14 Uncertainty index = 0.13

Impact Potential We found very little information about the impacts of N. indica on other plant species, animals, and humans. For this reason, the uncertainty for this risk element was very high. However, N. indica is listed as a weed of rice production systems in Asia (Waterhouse, 1993; Pieterse and Murphy, 1990; Enomoto, 2003). Furthermore, several herbicides have been tested for their ability to control N. indica in natural and production systems (Puri and Haller, 2010; Samanta et al., 2010). Thus, it seems likely to be causing some otherwise undocumented impacts in these systems. Risk score = 2.3 Uncertainty index = 0.47

Geographic Potential Nymphoides indica is an aquatic plant that grows in standing water (eFlora, 2009). We estimate that about 65 percent of the United States is suitable for establishment of N. indica (Fig. 1). The predicted distribution is based on the species’ known distribution elsewhere in the world and includes point-referenced localities and areas of occurrence obtained primarily from GBIF (2011). The map for N. indica represents the joint distribution of USDA Plant Hardiness Zones 5-13, areas with 10-100+ inches of annual precipitation, and the following Köppen-Geiger climate classes: tropical rainforest, tropical savanna, steppe, desert, mediterranean, humid continental warm summers, humid continental cool summers, humid subtropical, and marine west coast.

Entry Potential Because N. indica is already present in the United States in Texas and Florida (Saunders, 2004; Kartesz, 2010; Wunderlin, 1982), we did not evaluate its entry potential.

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 3 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Figure 1. Predicted distribution of Nymphoides indica in the United States. Map insets for Alaska, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico are not to scale.

2. Results and Conclusion Model Probabilities: P(Major Invader) = 63.4% P(Minor Invader) = 34.9% P(Non-Invader) = 1.7%

Risk Result = High Risk Secondary Screening = Not Applicable

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 4 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Figure 2. Nymphoides indica risk score (black box) relative to the risk scores of species used to develop and validate the WRA model (other symbols). See Appendix A for the complete assessment.

Figure 3. Monte Carlo simulation results (N=5000) for uncertainty around Nymphoides indica’s risk scoresa.

a The blue “+” symbol represents the medians of the simulated outcomes. The smallest box contains 50 percent of the outcomes, the second 95 percent, and the largest 99 percent.

3. Discussion The result of the assessment for N. indica is High Risk. Nymphoides indica is an aquatic plant that spreads by seed and vegetatively through underground roots. It has naturalized in Texas and Florida, and is considered to be spreading rapidly in Florida (Saunders, 2004; Jacono, 2002). Comparison of N. indica to the 204 species used in the WRA model validation study indicate that N. indica shares many of the same traits and impacts as other major- and high-scoring minor-invaders (Fig. 2). In the uncertainty analysis, 99.8 percent of

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 5 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

the simulated risk scores resulted in a conclusion of High Risk (Fig. 3). We found very little information about its impacts, but the fact that several herbicides have been tested for controlling it in natural and production systems (Puri and Haller, 2010; Samanta et al., 2010) indicates that N. indica has some apparently significant impacts.

4. Literature Cited Barker, R. D., and W. J. M. Vestjens. 1990. The Food of Australian Birds. 1. Non- Passerines. Csiro Publishing, Melbourne, Australia. 480 pp. Barrett, S. C. H. 1980. Dimorphic incompatibility and gender in Nymphoides indica Menyanthaceae). Canadian Journal of Botany 58(1980):1938-1942. CABI. 2011. Crop Protection Compendium. CAB International. http://www.cabicompendium.org/cpc/home.asp. (Archived at PERAL). Chuang, T. I., and R. Ornduff. 1992. Seed Morphology and Systematics of Menyanthaceae. American Journal of Botany 79(12):1396-1406. Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 2011. Yellow Floating Heart: An exotic aquatic plant, . Department of Conservation and Recreation, Office of Water Resources, Lakes and Ponds Program. http://www.mass.gov/dcr/watersupply/lakepond/factsheet/Yellow%20Floating%20H eart.pdf. (Archived at PERAL). Dave's Garden. 2011. Dave's Garden. http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/search.php?q=. (Archived at PERAL). eFlora. 2009. wwweFlora.org. Missouri Botanical Garden, St. Louis, MO & Harvard University Herbaria, Cambridge, MA. http://www.efloras.org/. (Archived at PERAL). Enomoto, T. 2003. Weeds of Japan. Okayama University, The Research Institute for Bioresources, Laboratory of Wild Plant Science. Last accessed August 28, 2008, http://www.rib.okayama-u.ac.jp/wild/zassou_table.htm. Freire, S. E., A. M. Arambarri, N. D. Bayón, G. Sancho, E. Urtubey, C. Monti, M. C. Novoa, and M. N. Colares. 2005. Epidermal characteristics of toxic plants for cattle from the Salado river basin (Buenos Aires, Argentina). Bulletin of the Botanical Society of Argentina 40(3-4):241 - 281. GBIF. 2011. GBIF, Online Database. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). http://data.gbif.org/welcome.htm. (Archived at PERAL). Heap, I. 2011. International survey of herbicide resistant weeds. Weed Science Society of America. www.weedscience.com. http://www.weedscience.org/In.asp. (Archived at PERAL). Heide-Jørgensen, H. S. 2008. Parasitic flowering plants. Brill Publishers, Leiden, The Netherlands. 442 pp. Holm, L. G., J. V. Pancho, J. P. Herberger, and D. L. Plucknett. 1979. A Geographical Atlas of World Weeds. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida, U.S.A. 391 pp. Iverson, R. 2010. Risk assessments(RA) for Nymphoides crista, peltata and indica. Personal communication to A. Tasker on October 28, 2010, from Rick Iverson, North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Weeds Specialist. Jacono, C. 2002. Florida's floating-hearts: Know Nymphoides. Aquaphyte 22(1):Insert. Kartesz, J. 2010. Floristic Synthesis of North America by Biota of North America Program (BONAP), Version 1.0. Biota of North America Program. http://www.bonap.org/index.html. (Archived at PERAL). Lock, K. 2010. Floating Hearts (Nymphoides indica). Rio Dulce in Guatemala. Last accessed January 6, 2012, http://www.inriodulce.com/.

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 6 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Martin, P. G., and J. M. Dowd. 1990. A Protein Sequence Study of the Dicotyledons and its Relevance to the Evolution of the Legumes and Nitrogen Fixation. Australian Systematic Botany 3(1990):91-100. Mason, D., and A. G. van der Valk. 1992. Growth responses of Nymphoides indica seedlings and vegetative propagules along water depth gradient. Aquatic Botany 42:339-350. Nault, M. E., and A. Mikulyuk. 2009. Yellow Floating Heart (Nymphoides peltata): A Technical Review of Distribution, Ecology, Impacts, and Management. PUB-SS- 1051. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Bureau of Science Services, Madison, Wisconsin. NGRP. 2011. Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN). United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Resources Service, National Germplasm Resources Program (NGRP). http://www.ars-grin.gov. (Archived at PERAL). NRCS. 2011. The PLANTS Database. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The National Plant Data Center. National Plant Data Center, Baton Rouge. Last accessed January 14, 2009, http://plants.usda.gov/java/nameSearch. Ohwi, J. 1984. Flora of Japan (edited English version, reprint. Original 1954). National Science Museum, Tokyo, Japan. 1067 pp. Ornduff, R. 1969. Neotropical Nymphoides (Menyanthaceae): Meso-American and West Indian Species. Brittonia 21(4):346-352. Ornduff, R., and T. Mosquin. 1970. Variation in the spectral qualities of in the Nymphoides indica complex (Menyanthaceae) and its possible adaptive significance. Canadian Journal of Botany 718(1970):603-605. Pieterse, A. H., and K. J. Murphy. 1990. Aquatic Weeds. Oxford University Press, New York, New York. 593 pp. Puri, A., and W. T. Haller. 2010. Best management practices (BMP's) for Rotala and Nymphoides control. Invasive Plant Management Section Research and Outreach Program Newsletter 2(1):9-10. Reed, C. F. 1977. Economically Important Foreign Weeds: Potential problems in the United states. Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture., U.S.A. 746 pp. Samanta, P., T. Senapati, K. A. Mukherjee, S. Mondal, S. Haque, and A. R. Ghosh. 2010. Effectiveness of Almix in controlling aquatic weeds and fish growth and its consequent influence on water and sediment quality of a pond. The Bioscan 3:691- 700. Saunders, K. 2004. First record of Nymphoides indica (Menyanthaceae) in Texas. SIDA, Contributions to Botany 21(4):2441-2443. Shibayama, Y., and Y. Kadono. 2003. Floral morph composition and pollen limitation in the seed set of Nymphoides indica populations. Ecological Research 18(2003):725-737. Shibayama, Y., and Y. Kadono. 2007a. The effect of water-level fluctuations on seedling recruitment in an aquatic macrophyte Nymphoides indica (L.) Kuntze (Menyanthaceae). Aquatic Botany 87(4):320-324. Shibayama, Y., and Y. Kadono. 2007b. Reproductive success and genetic structure of populations of the heterostylous aquatic plant Nymphoides indica (L.) Kuntze (Menyanthaceae). Aquatic Botany 86(1):1-8. Sivarajan, V. V., and K. T. Joseph. 1993. The Nymphoides Séguier (Menyanthaceae) in India. Aquatic Botany 45:145-170. Smits, A. J. M., R. van Ruremonde, and G. van der Velde. 1989. Seed dispersal of three nymphaeid macrophytes. Aquatic Biology 35(1989):167-180. University of Georgia. 2010. Early Detection and Distribution Mapping System (EDD Maps). University of Georgia.

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 7 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

http://www.eddmaps.org/southeast/distribution/point.cfm?id=633409. (Archived at PERAL). Waterhouse, D. F. 1993. The Major Arthropod Pests and Weeds of Agriculture in Southeast Asia: Distribution, Importance and Origin. Canberra. vi + 141 pp. Wunderlin, R. P. 1982. Guide to the Vascular Plants of Florida. University Presses, Tampa, Florida. 472 pp.

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 8 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Appendix A. Weed risk assessment for Nymphoides indica (L.) Kuntze (Menyanthaceae). The following information was obtained from the species’ risk assessment, which was conducted on a Microsoft Excel platform. The information shown below was modified to fit on the page. The original Excel file, the full questions, and the guidance to answer the questions are available upon request.

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty Establishment/Spread Potential ES-1 (Invasiveness elsewhere) f - low 5 Naturalized in Texas and "spreading rapidly" in Florida (Saunders, 2004; Jacono, 2002). In Florida, "[p]robably escaped from cultivation" (Wunderlin, 1982). "This plant will naturally spread on its own....The plants may need thinning out from time to time as they can eventually cover the pond" (Lock, 2010). Ornduff (Ornduff, 1969) grouped plants with the name N. humboldtiana that were native to the new world with N. indica plants from the old world. Nymphoides indica was the name with priority. This means that N. indica is considered to be native to Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, Puerto Rico, South America, India, Japan, China, and Australia (Ornduff, 1969; Ohwi, 1984). The alternate answer used in the Monte Carlo simulation is e. ES-2 (Domesticated to reduce n - negl 0 No evidence and well studied. weed potential) ES-3 (Weedy congeners) y - low 1 Nymphoides peltata has been observed in Massachusettes as being very agressive and capable of rapid growth and spread (Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2011). "N. peltata is considered a noxious weed in New Zealand...is also declared as invasive in Sweden...and Ireland....Control efforts in Sweden involving the mechanical cutting and removal of N. peltata are estimated at costing...$4,500 U.S....per hectare..., or $9,000 U.S....annually if the recommended procedure of cutting twice a year is followed" (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009). ES-4 (Shade Tolerance) n - low 0 Grows in full sun (University of Georgia, 2010) ES-5 (Climbing or smothering n - negl 0 Plant is not a vine. Nymphoides indica is an aquatic growth form) plant (Barrett, 1980; CABI, 2011; eFlora, 2009). ES-6 (Dense Thickets) y - mod 2 The related species N. peltata that has a similar life form and habit forms dense mats (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009). ES-7 (Aquatic) y - negl 1 Nymphoides indica is an aquatic plant (Barrett, 1980; CABI, 2011; eFlora, 2009). ES-8 (Grass) n - negl 0 It is in the family Menyanthaceae (NGRP, 2011), not Poaceae. ES-9 (N2-fixer) n - negl 0 Not in a plant family known to have N-fixing capabilities (Martin and Dowd, 1990).

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 9 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty ES-10 (Viable seeds) y - negl 1 Produces viable seeds (Shibayama and Kadono, 2003). "Propagation can also be done by seed" (Lock, 2010). "Seeds are brown and globose" (eFlora, 2009). ES-11 (Self-compatible) n - negl -1 The flowers of N. indica are self-incompatible (Ornduff and Mosquin, 1970). In N. peltata floral dimorphism is associated with a strong self-incompatibility system (Barrett, 1980). ES-12 (Special Pollinators) n - negl 0 The following four orders of pollinating insects were observed visiting the flowers of Nymphoides indica: Lepidoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, and Coleoptera (Shibayama and Kadono, 2003). ES-13 (Min generation time) b - negl 1 Mason and van der Valk "planted" seeds and then harvested seeds from those plants after one year (Mason and van der Valk, 1992). "[P]lants of Nymphoides often behave as annuals when they grow in temporary ponds, although they will persist for years when they occupy permanent bodies of water" (Ornduff, 1969). "Annual herb" (Reed, 1977). The alternate answers for the Monte Carlo simulation are a, then c. ES-14 (Prolific reproduction) ? - max 0 "Seeds 18-25 in each " (Sivarajan and Joseph, 1993). Seed set rate of different N. indica populations varies from nine percent to 87 percent. (Shibayama and Kadono, 2007b). Flowers in clusters of 15-35 (Sivarajan and Joseph, 1993). No information found about the number of capsules produced. ES-15 (Unintentional dispersal) y - mod 1 The related species N. peltata is spread unintentionally by boats and fishing gear (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009). ES-16 (Trade contaminant) ? - max 0 Unknown for N. indica, but for the related species N. peltata: "It is also possible for N. peltata to be a ‘hitchhiker’ plant, traveling with other species ordered through water garden catalogs" (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009). ES-17 (#Natural dispersal 1 - -2 Seed description used to help answer the next five vectors) questions: “Seeds brown, globose, 1.2-1.5 mm; seed coat smooth” (eFlora, 2009). ES-17a (Wind dispersal) n - low No evidence of adaptations for wind dispersal (Chuang and Ornduff, 1992). ES-17b (Water dispersal) y - negl "Boesewinkel and Bouman (1984) suggest that the 'air- filled (seed) hairs of Nymphoides and ' and the air-filled cells of the testa of may serve to aid the dispersal of these seeds via water....The seeds of those members of Menyanthaceae we have studied...appear to have hydrophobic surfaces and will float for several days after their release from capsules, even from capsules that are submerged at maturity" (Chuang and Ornduff, 1992). Because Nymphoides indica is an aquatic plant, it also seems highly likely

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 10 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty that its seeds would be water dispersed.

ES-17c (Bird dispersal) n - low The seeds of N. indica have been found in the stomach contents of plumed whistling ducks in Australia (Barker and Vestjens, 1990), but the viability of these seeds is likely destroyed during the digestion process (Smits et al., 1989). ES-17d (Animal external n - low No evidence. Seed coat is smooth (eFlora, 2009). dispersal) ES-17e (Animal internal n - mod No evidence. dispersal) ES-18 (Seed bank) y - negl 1 Nymphoides indica produces a seed bank that last over three years (Shibayama and Kadono, 2007a). ES-19 (Tolerance to loss of y - mod 1 Plants reproduce and spread vegetatively through biomass) and underwater roots (Lock, 2010; Shibayama and Kadono, 2003). Because mechanical harvesting often spreads fragments of the related species N. peltata (Nault and Mikulyuk, 2009), it is very likely N. indica is dispersed similarly. ES-20 (Herbicide resistance) n - low 0 No evidence and well studied (Heap, 2011).

ES-21 (# Cold hardiness zones) 9 0

ES-22 (# Climate types) 9 2 ES-23 (# Precipitation bands) 10 1

Impact Potential General Impacts Imp-G1 (Allelopathic) n - low 0 No evidence. It is unlikely that an aquatic plant would express an allelopathic trait, since it would be hard for any allelopathic chemicals produced to build up to effective levels in a body of water . Imp-G2 (Parasitic) n - negl 0 Nymphoides indica is not in a plant family known to have members with parasitic traits (Heide-Jørgensen, 2008). Impacts to Natural Systems

Imp-N1 (Ecosystem processes) ? - max We were unable to find any information about specific impacts that N. indica has in natural systems. However, because herbicide trials are being conducted to control this species in natural environments (Puri and Haller, 2010), N. indica is likely having some undocumented

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 11 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty impacts in these environments. Consequently, answering unknown for this question and the next two. Imp-N2 (Community structure) ? - max Unknown.

Imp-N3 (Community ? - max Unknown. composition) Imp-N4 (T&E species) ? - max Unknown. Imp-N5 (Globally outstanding ? - max Unknown. ecoregions) Imp-N6 (Natural systems weed) c - negl 0.6 Herbicides trials are being conducted in FL to control N. indica in natural environments (Puri and Haller, 2010). The alternate answer for the Monte Carlo simulation is b. Impact to Anthropogenic areas (cities, suburbs, roadways) Imp-A1 (Affects property, n - mod 0 No evidence. civilization, ...) Imp-A2 (Recreational use) n - mod 0 No evidence.

Imp-A3 (Affects ornamental n - mod 0 No evidence. plants) Imp-A4 (Anthropogenic weed) a - low 0 This plant is grown as an ornamental in water gardens (Dave's Garden, 2011). No evidence that this plant is considered a weed in urban/suburabn areas. Alternate answer is b. Impact to Production systems (agriculture, nurseries, forest plantations, orchards, etc.) Imp-P1 (Crop yield) ? - max In spite that this species is considered a weed in production systems and herbicide trials to control it have been conducted, there is no documented evidence of impact. Consequently, answering unknown for this impact and the next two questions as there are likely some undocumented impacts. Imp-P2 (Commodity Value) ? - max Unknown.

Imp-P3 (Affects trade) ? - max Unknown. Imp-P4 (Irrigation) n - mod 0 No evidence. Imp-P5 (Animal toxicity) y - mod 0.1 Listed as a plant that is toxic to cattle in Argentina (Freire et al., 2005). Imp-P6 (Production system c - low 0.6 Herbicide trials have been conducted to test herbicide weed) control of N. indica in production systems (Samanta et al., 2010). Nymphoides indica is considered a Principal weed in Surinam (Holm et al., 1979). It is a weed in rice production systems in Southeast Asia (Waterhouse, 1993; Pieterse and Murphy, 1990) and is considered a

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 12 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty weed in Japan (Enomoto, 2003). The alternate answer used for the Monte Carlo simulation is b.

Geographic Potential Note: Below “PS” refers to geo-referenced point source (latitude/longitude) data. Unless otherwise noted, all data was obtained from (GBIF, 2011). Plant cold hardiness zones

Geo-Z1 (Zone 1) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-Z2 (Zone 2) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-Z3 (Zone 3) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-Z4 (Zone 4) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-Z5 (Zone 5) y - low N/A Point Source (PS): South Korea Geo-Z6 (Zone 6) y - negl N/A PS: China, South Korea, Poland Geo-Z7 (Zone 7) y - negl N/A PS: Japan, South Korea Geo-Z8 (Zone 8) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Japan Geo-Z9 (Zone 9) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, China Geo-Z10 (Zone 10) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Mexico, Florida, Myanmar Geo-Z11 (Zone 11) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Mexico Geo-Z12 (Zone 12) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Mexico Geo-Z13 (Zone 13) y - negl N/A PS: Cote d'Ivoire, Mexico Koppen-Geiger climate classes Geo-C1 (Tropical rainforest) y - negl N/A PS: Papua New Guinea

Geo-C2 (Tropical savanna) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Myanmar, Florida

Geo-C3 (Steppe) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Botswana Geo-C4 (Desert) y - low N/A PS: Australia, Mali Geo-C5 (Mediterranean) y - high N/A PS: Columbia Geo-C6 (Humid subtropical) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Mozambique, Florida

Geo-C7 (Marine west coast) y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Madagascar

Geo-C8 (Humid cont. warm y - negl N/A PS: South Korea sum.) Geo-C9 (Humid cont. cool sum.) y - mod N/A PS: Poland

Geo-C10 (Subarctic) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-C11 (Tundra) n - negl N/A No evidence. Geo-C12 (Icecap) n - negl N/A No evidence. 10-inch precipitation bands Geo-R1 (0-10") n - mod N/A No evidence.

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 13 Weed Risk Assessment for Nymphoides indica

Question ID Answer - Score Notes (and references) Uncertainty Geo-R2 (10-20") y - low N/A PS: Bolivia, Botswana Geo-R3 (20-30") y - negl N/A PS: Australia, South Africa Geo-R4 (30-40") y - negl N/A PS: Australia, Botswana Geo-R5 (40-50") y - negl N/A PS: Australia, China, New York Geo-R6 (50-60") y - negl N/A PS: Australia, China, South Korea, Florida Geo-R7 (60-70") y - negl N/A PS: Japan Geo-R8 (70-80") y - negl N/A PS: Viet Nam, Japan Geo-R9 (80-90") y - negl N/A PS: Papua New Guinea Geo-R10 (90-100") y - negl N/A PS: Papua New Guinea Geo-R11 (100"+) y - negl N/A PS: Papua New Guinea Entry Potential Ent-1 (Already here) y - negl 1 Naturalized in Texas (Saunders, 2004) and Florida (Kartesz, 2010; Wunderlin, 1982). Native to Puerto Rico (Ornduff, 1969; NRCS, 2011). Ent-2 (Proposed for entry) N/A

Ent-3 (Human value & N/A cultivation/trade status) Ent-4 (Entry as a Contaminant)

Ent-4a (In MX, CA, Central N/A Amer., Carib., or China)

Ent-4b (Propagative material) N/A

Ent-4c (Seeds) N/A Ent-4d (Ballast water) N/A Ent-4e (Aquaria) N/A Ent-4f (Landscape products) N/A

Ent-4g (Container, packing, N/A trade goods) Ent-4h (Commodities for N/A consumption) Ent-4i (Other pathway) N/A Ent-5 (Natural dispersal) N/A

Ver 1. (Original) June 14, 2012 14